The NZ dollar has tumbled and the stock market has fallen.
A photograph of fallen stock in the window of a shop on Lichfield Street.
A photograph of the interior of a shop on Lichfield Street. Fallen stock litters the floor.
The head of the stock exchange, Mark Weldon, is leading the Government's fundraising efforts for the Christchurch Earthquake Appeal.
A photograph of the store room of Quinns on Papanui Road. The front walls of the building have crumbled, exposing the rooms inside. Decorations such as a mushroom and grass can be seen.
A photograph of Munns the Man's Shop on Armagh Street. The windows have shattered and the glass has fallen onto the footpath. The stock and posters for an "end of lease" sale can still be seen inside the store.
A photograph of the store room of Quinns on Papanui Road. The front walls of the building have crumbled, exposing the rooms inside. Shelves of shoes can be seen, many of them collapsed.
Another hole has appeared in the street where a building has been demolished. Selwyn Dealers next door sensibly moved all their stock away from the adjoining wall just in case.
Sheep and cattle farmers in Hawke's bay have rallied round to help raise over 40 thousand dollars for the Christchurch Earthquake Fund.
One portrait colour digital photograph taken on 15 April 2011 showing the demolition of Coastal Living Design Store on London Street. This photograph shows the building's flagpole being salvaged for the building owner during the demolition. Also visible are the stock and shop fittings which were unable to be retrieved. In Christchurch's Centra...
Unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings have repeatedly been shown to perform poorly in large magnitude earthquakes, with both New Zealand and Australia having a history of past earthquakes that have resulted in fatalities due to collapsed URM buildings. A comparison is presented here of the URM building stock and the seismic vulnerability of Christchurch and Adelaide in order to demonstrate the relevance to Australian cities of observations in Christchurch resulting from the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake swarm. It is shown that the materials, architecture and hence earthquake strength of URM buildings in both countries is comparable and that Adelaide and other cities of Australia have seismic vulnerability sufficient to cause major damage to their URM buildings should a design level earthquake occur. Such an earthquake is expected to cause major building damage, and fatalities should be expected.
The 4th of September 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake had generated significant ground shaking within the Christchurch Central Business District (CBD). Despite the apparently significant shaking, the observed structural damage for pre-1970s reinforced concrete (RC) buildings was indeed limited and lower than what was expected for such typology of buildings. This paper explores analytically and qualitatively the different aspects of the "apparent‟ good seismic performance of the pre-1970s RC buildings in the Christchurch CBD, following the earthquake reconnaissance survey by the authors. Damage and building parameters survey result, based on a previously established inventory of building stock of these non-ductile RC buildings, is briefly reported. From an inventory of 75 buildings, one building was selected as a numerical case-study to correlate the observed damage with the non-linear analyses. The result shows that the pre-1970s RC frame buildings performed as expected given the intensity of the ground motion shaking during the Canterbury earthquake. Given the brittle nature of this type of structure, it was demonstrated that more significant structural damage and higher probability of collapse could occur when the buildings were subjected to alternative input signals with different frequency content and duration characteristics and still compatible to the seismicity hazard for Christchurch CBD.
Questions to Ministers 1. RAHUI KATENE to the Associate Minister of Health: When was the Core Clinical Committee established in Kawerau and how are iwi involved in the membership and functions of this joint taskforce to tackle youth suicide? 2. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Infrastructure: What progress is the Government making on its infrastructure investment programme? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: What advice did he rely on when commenting in Australia on the safety of the Pike River coal mine? 4. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Corrections: What support has the Corrections Department provided in Canterbury since the first earthquake struck in September last year? 5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he believe that in the current economic environment kiwi companies should be considered favourably with regards to big government contracts? 6. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What parenting support is being made available for first-time parents? 7. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: In light of the answer given on his behalf to Oral Question No 2 on 15 June, is it his opinion that real average after-tax wages do not go up when high-income earners get tax cuts and low-income workers lose their jobs? 8. PAUL QUINN to the Minister of Customs: What recent reports has he received on developments to technology at the border? 9. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Has sufficient funding been allocated in Vote Health to meet the increasing costs facing organisations working in the health sector? 10. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: Was she satisfied before the first explosion in the Pike River coal mine, that her Government had done all it could to ensure the workplace safety of people working in underground coal mines; if so, why? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Fisheries: What recent announcement has he made about the recovery of the western hoki stock? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by all her answers to Oral Question No 10 yesterday?
Six months after the 4 September 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, a Mw 6.2 Christchurch (Lyttelton) aftershock struck Christchurch on the 22 February 2011. This earthquake was centred approximately 10km south-east of the Christchurch CBD at a shallow depth of 5km, resulting in intense seismic shaking within the Christchurch central business district (CBD). Unlike the 4 Sept earthquake when limited-to-moderate damage was observed in engineered reinforced concrete (RC) buildings [35], in the 22 February event a high number of RC Buildings in the Christchurch CBD (16.2 % out of 833) were severely damaged. There were 182 fatalities, 135 of which were the unfortunate consequences of the complete collapse of two mid-rise RC buildings. This paper describes immediate observations of damage to RC buildings in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Some preliminary lessons are highlighted and discussed in light of the observed performance of the RC building stock. Damage statistics and typical damage patterns are presented for various configurations and lateral resisting systems. Data was collated predominantly from first-hand post-earthquake reconnaissance observations by the authors, complemented with detailed assessment of the structural drawings of critical buildings and the observed behaviour. Overall, the 22 February 2011 Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquake was a particularly severe test for both modern seismically-designed and existing non-ductile RC buildings. The sequence of earthquakes since the 4 Sept 2010, particularly the 22 Feb event has confirmed old lessons and brought to life new critical ones, highlighting some urgent action required to remedy structural deficiencies in both existing and “modern” buildings. Given the major social and economic impact of the earthquakes to a country with strong seismic engineering tradition, no doubt some aspects of the seismic design will be improved based on the lessons from Christchurch. The bar needs to and can be raised, starting with a strong endorsement of new damage-resisting, whilst cost-efficient, technologies as well as the strict enforcement, including financial incentives, of active policies for the seismic retrofit of existing buildings at a national scale.